It is theoretically possible that bacteria developed on Mars early in its history and that some were carried to Earth by a meteorite. However, strains of bacteria from different planets would probably have substantial differences in protein structure that would persist over time, and no two bacterial strains on Earth are different enough to have arisen on different planets. So, even if bacteria did arrive on Earth from Mars, they must have died out.
The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. It fails to establish whether bacteria actually developed on Mars.
B. It fails to establish how likely it is that Martian bacteria were transported to Earth.
C. It fails to consider whether there were means other than meteorites by which Martian bacteria could have been carried to Earth.
D. It fails to consider whether all bacteria now on Earth could have arisen from transported Martian bacteria.
E. It fails to consider whether there could have been strains of bacteria that originated on Earth and later died out.
ANS: D 想請問E選項~~錯在哪裡? 雖然感覺D選項比較強烈~但是E感覺也有相關~~感謝大家講解~~! 多謝~~!作者: rudder86 时间: 2010-12-24 21:18
題目論點: 沒有 2個細菌的特徵 是特別到足以說明 這2個細菌來自不同星球.
要 weaken 這個論點, 就是 D 選項, 細菌 可能都來自於 Mars.(源自於同一個星球)
至於 E 選項, 曾經有細菌原生在地球, 然後死光光了. 那怎麼解釋 現在的細菌? 還是來自於另一個星球?
這不就又支持了D選項?
